Talk:Battleships/@comment-26915086-20160626213838/@comment-26915086-20160628032031
I would be honored to help you, but as a comrade, I still have work and the like, but if we can find a time that works I would be happy to give you some pointers. In terms of Andromeda and her superstructure, I have been considering adding a hefty secondary such as the 40cm to that area both aft and fore, but the 46 is a bit too big to fit in both places without massive changes. Besides the fact that I am simply too lazy to change the ship, there is something I like about having four big guns. She has equal protection on all sides, which makes her more versatile, and because the armament is even, the superstructure of the ship is farther forward. When fighting, battleships tend to trundle headlong into enemy fire in order to get in range of valuable ships, which means taking shots to the front (espically when you pack lighter, shorter ranged main guns) the superstructure acts like a barrier, effectively rendering most of the ship aft of it unhittable. Thus putting the front of the superstructure ahead of the ships center dramatically increases damage resistance, (Or so I’ve found) so long as the ship is moving headlong. Of course, once in range, the ship turns broadside and brings the full complement to bear, effectively negating this advantage, in favor of additional firepower. This defensive ability when closing was first intended for the benefit of my smaller battleships to allow them to close to range even under an enemy 46 cm. this armament scheme was standard practice in the fleet by the time Perseus (the immediate predecessor to Andromeda) was commissioned, notice Traveler, Chika, Tet, and Perseus all have four guns arranged in this manner. So it makes sense then that the next ship would follow a similar gun scheme. In the case of Andromeda, she can turn broadside before most enemy ships can open up, but in some cases closing more is useful, even with her long arm, (for instance if I need to bring the secondary guns to bear) the other use would be to attack a slower CV (or similar target), which is retreating as it launches aircraft. Andromeda is reasonably fast after all (though I would like about ten more Kts. Even still it would seem a mystery to give up three of the most deadly guns in the game (and likely IRL) in exchange for something so frivolous in the case of Andromeda, but the contract for the ship specified that she should sport overwhelming durability, speed, and flexibility, it said nothing of overwhelming firepower. An additional turret would negatively impact speed, (the hull is a bit overburdened as is) stability, and durability, so the third turret on the bow was rejected, after all, anyone can build a barge. Thanks for the advice, and I may try five guns on a future design, but I think the Andromeda should stay as is for now. ------------------------------------------------------------- the map looks pretty close to what I remember, do you have an estimate as to start data?